Quote:
|
Originally Posted by P.Asmah
OK, I think we now all agree that comets display what is loosely referred to as charge-exchange-reaction, even if interpretations of this phenomena may vary?
|
What makes you think that there is room for interpretation?
tusenfem has explained what a charge-exchange reaction is, and the term is not applied "loosely" to explain the X-ray emission in comets:
ions from the Solar Wind hit (i.e., come into close contact, with distances of the order of the size of the molecules) molecules and atoms from the comet; ions and molecules exchange electrons, leaving the (ion + electron) in a highly excited state; when the newly formed atom undergoes a transition towards the ground-state, electromagnetic radiation is emitted (considering the energies involved, this radiation is composed of X-rays).
The observed emission can be used to do spectroscopy of Solar Wind particles:
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by UT
By comparing the ratio of X-ray energies emitted, scientists can determine the content of the solar wind and infer the content of the comet material.
|
They can only infer the comet material from these measurement, because the emission comes from Solar Wind material.
And since the spectrum can be quite complicated, they need a reference:
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by UT
Porter and his colleagues at Goddard and Lawrence Livermore tested the charge exchange theory in an earthbound laboratory in 2003. That experiment, at Livermore's EBIT-I electron beam ion trap, produced a complex spectrograph of intensity versus X-ray energy for a variety of expected elements in the solar wind and comet. "We are anxious to compare nature's laboratory to the one we created," Porter said.
|
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by P.Asmah
In others words, they exhibit some form of electrical behaviour?
|
The same type of electrical behaviour any piece of matter shows, but nothing peculiar of EU/PC ideas.
Just plain old atomic physics.
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by P.Asmah
Surely, therefore, some form of signature in the form of electromagnetic radiation is expected?
|
That is known as spectroscopy. It has been around for 200 years.
Using X-ray emission is a standard technique to identify the elements in a material, so standard that it can be imlpemented without to much trouble in electron microscopes (the electron beam excites the sample, which then emits X-rays).
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by P.Asmah
Surely it goes without saying (To borrow from the lexicon of Tusenfem and Tim Thompson) that some form of X-rays are highly probable?
|
What do you mean with "form"?
If you are referring to energy or wavelength, then yes some wavelengths are more probable because they correspond to specific and probable electronic transitions in atoms. That's why we can use spectroscopy to identify elements.
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by P.Asmah
And talking of EM radiation, didn't Alfven discover Synchroton (Very intense) radiation? If I remember rightly, it's produced by fast-moving electrons in the presence of magnetic fields. I guess its fairly important given that most of the radiation recorded by radio telescopes is derived from this mechanism?
In 1950 I think this was a remarkable suggestion, given that plasma and magnetic fields were thought to have little, if anything, to do in a cosmos filled with 'island universes' (galaxies). It provided additional evidence for the existence of extensive magnetic fields, and indicates that enormous amounts of energy may be converted, stored, and released by cosmic plasma!
|
Show us in detail how this is relevant to the OP.
Synchrotron radiation is not the same as radiation from charge-exchange.
By the way:
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by papageno
since Juergens' theory does not explictly predict X-ray emission by charge-exchange between solar wind ions and comet material, can you show us the reasoning that led you to the conclusion that Juergens' theory is relevant and should be mentioned when the explanation of the phenomenon is to be attributed?
|
It's time to answer.